God help us all!
I can feel my wallet getting $45T lighter even as I type!
There may be some truth to this. I went to the beach this weekend, and when I returned my skin was red and sensitive to the touch.
My god, the “biodiversity” of the oceans is in jeopardy. The “biodiversity.” I mean, our small, dull, purposeless lives are NOTHING in comparison to the “biodiversity” of the oceans. Nothing.
These kinds of revelations are important when you are terrified of having to look for a REAL job and you rely on government funding to stay employed. Tell ‘em what they want to hear and the money will continue rolling in.
The good news is that higher ocean temperatures cause degassification which means that the oceans will release carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, lowering seawater acidity.
These stories all have the caveat “could leave”. The word “could” is used quite extensively in these stories.
I think they’ve been “doing acid”
It's too late, it's already happening!!!!!!!
It must be true! I was at the beach today and I saw a skeleton of a fish! It had to be acid, what else could it be?
A Junior High student won a award and the drawing was published in all the major local papers where the claim was made that sea levels will rise two-hundred feet, with the addition of that much fresh water the acidity ought to drop.
Can’t we just dump giant Tums tablets into the ocean?
That must mean the erf PRODUCES CO2! We're doomed.
Whoa!!! The first paragraph is decisive!
OK, someone help me here.
Supposedly, fossil fuels came from dead plants and animals.
Plants get their carbon from CO2 in the air, through photosynthesis. Animals get their carbon by eating plants.
So all of the fossil fuels were at one time CO2 in the atmosphere.
Was the ocean acidic back then, when life started on earth? If so, how did life get started? If not, then how can we be ruining the earth by burning fossil fuels?
I believe that ice cores from Greenland and Antarctica have shown that CO2 concentrations are cyclic, that they rise 300-800 years after the global temperature increases (that is, they don’t cause global warming), and that the concentration has been higher in the past than it is now.
Why do the crackpot scientists get the headlines?
Big deal!
Same thing you get when you drink a Coca Cola or other carbonated soft drink only the ocean version is very highly diluted.
In this section of our web site we maintain an ever-expanding archive of the results of peer-reviewed scientific studies that report the growth responses of plants to atmospheric CO2 enrichment. Results are updated weekly and posted according to two types of growth response (Dry Weight and Photosynthesis). If you are an author of a CO2-enrichment study that is not included in our data base and would like to have your results posted here, or if you are aware of such a study, please send us a copy of the peer-reviewed journal article and we will incorporate its findings into our database as soon as possible.
Dry Weight (Biomass)
Photosynthesis (Net CO2 Exchange Rate)
http://www.co2science.org/data/plant_growth/plantgrowth.php
Carbon Dioxide and the "Climate Crisis" - Reality or Illusion?
An Investigative Documentary by CO2Science
http://www.co2science.org/video/ClimateCrisis.php
Just like when a fine porterhouse has good consequences for me but not so good for the cow. Makes me hungry just thinking about it.
ABSTRACT:
"Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is the product of oceanic respiration due to the well-known but under-appreciated solubility pump. Carbon dioxide rises out of warm ocean waters where it is added to the atmosphere. There it is mixed with residual and accidental CO2, and circulated, to be absorbed into the sink of the cold ocean waters. Next the thermohaline circulation carries the CO2-rich sea water deep into the ocean. A millennium later it appears at the surface in warm waters, saturated by lower pressure and higher temperature, to be exhausted back into the atmosphere. Throughout the past 420 millennia, comprising four interglacial periods, the Vostok record of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration is imprinted with, and fully characterized by, the physics of the solubility of CO2 in water, along with the lag in the deep ocean circulation.
Notwithstanding that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, atmospheric carbon dioxide has neither caused nor amplified global temperature increases. Increased carbon dioxide has been an effect of global warming, not a cause. Technically, carbon dioxide is a lagging proxy for ocean temperatures. When global temperature, and along with it, ocean temperature rises, the physics of solubility causes atmospheric CO2 to increase.
If increases in carbon dioxide, or any other greenhouse gas, could have in turn raised global temperatures, the positive feedback would have been catastrophic. While the conditions for such a catastrophe were present in the Vostok record from natural causes, the runaway event did not occur. Carbon dioxide does not accumulate in the atmosphere."
http://www.rocketscientistsjournal.com/2006/10/co2_acquittal.html
_______________________________________________________________
The graph above represents temperature and CO2 levels over the past 400,000 years. It is the same exact data Al Gore and the rest of the man-made global warmers refer to. The blue line is temps, the red CO2 levels. The deep valleys represent 4 separate glaciation periods. Now look very carefully at this relationship between temps and CO2 levels and keep in mind that Gore claims this data is the 'proof' that CO2 has warmed the earth in the past. But does the graph indeed show this? Nope. In fact, rising CO2 levels all throughout this 400,000 year period actually lagged behind temperature increases ...by an average of 800 years! So it couldn't have been CO2 that got Earth out of these 4 past glaciations. Yet Gore dishonestly and continually claims otherwise.-ETL
_______________________________________________________________
"The above chart shows the range of global temperature through the last 500 million years. There is no statistical correlation between the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere through the last 500 million years and the temperature record in this interval. In fact, one of the highest levels of carbon dioxide concentration occurred during a major ice age that occurred about 450 million years ago. Carbon dioxide concentrations at that time were about 15 times higher than at present.":
http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=010405M
_______________________________________________________________
FWD:
So, greenhouse [effect] is all about carbon dioxide, right?
Wrong. The most important players on the greenhouse stage are water vapor and clouds. Carbon dioxide has been increased to about 0.038% of the atmosphere (possibly from about 0.028% pre-Industrial Revolution) while water in its various forms ranges from 0% to 4% of the atmosphere and its properties vary by what form it is in and even at what altitude it is found in the atmosphere.
In simple terms the bulk of Earth's greenhouse effect is due to water vapor by virtue of its abundance. Water accounts for about 90% of the Earth's greenhouse effect -- perhaps 70% is due to water vapor and about 20% due to clouds (mostly water droplets), some estimates put water as high as 95% of Earth's total tropospheric greenhouse effect (e.g., Freidenreich and Ramaswamy, 'Solar Radiation Absorption by Carbon Dioxide, Overlap with Water, and a Parameterization for General Circulation Models,' Journal of Geophysical Research 98 (1993):7255-7264).
The remaining portion comes from carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane, ozone and miscellaneous other 'minor greenhouse gases.' As an example of the relative importance of water it should be noted that changes in the relative humidity on the order of 1.3-4% are equivalent to the effect of doubling CO2.
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/
_______________________________________________________________
FWD:
Water Vapor Rules the Greenhouse System
Water vapor constitutes Earth's most significant greenhouse gas, accounting for about 95% of Earth's greenhouse effect (4). Interestingly, many 'facts and figures' regarding global warming completely ignore the powerful effects of water vapor in the greenhouse system, carelessly (perhaps, deliberately) overstating human impacts as much as 20-fold.
Water vapor is 99.999% of natural origin. Other atmospheric greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and miscellaneous other gases (CFC's, etc.), are also mostly of natural origin (except for the latter, which is mostly anthropogenic).
Human activites contribute slightly to greenhouse gas concentrations through farming, manufacturing, power generation, and transportation. However, these emissions are so dwarfed in comparison to emissions from natural sources we can do nothing about, that even the most costly efforts to limit human emissions would have a very small-- perhaps undetectable-- effect on global climate.
There seems to be growing evidence that global warming is highly correlated to solar cycles. This makes it imperative for the anti-capitalism crowd to identify some other global catastrophe caused by burning fossil fuels before the global cooling sets in.
